In message <[email protected]>, =?iso-8859-1?
Q?Ask_Bj=F8rn_Hansen?= writes:
>I thought this might be of interest:
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/TrafficServerProposal
It probably is -- for some people.
My impression of Inktomi is that it is a much more comprehensive
solution than Varnish, it does SMTP, NNTP and much else.
If I were to start Yahoo, HotMail or a similar app today, I would
seriously consider starting out on Inktomi, because of the scalability,
horizontal and vertical, it offers.
Varnish on the other hand, only does HTTP, but aims to do it with
ultimate performance and flexibility, by pushing the technological
envelope as far as it can be pushed.
But For me, personally, the main difference is one of size:
Inktomi:
*.h 93920
*.c 50892
*.hh 0
*.cc 350199
------------
495011
Varnish:
*.h 5957
*.c 38871
*.hh 0
*.cc 0
------------
44828
We have a rhyming saying in Denmark that goes: "En lille og vågen,
er bedre end en stor og doven" which roughly translates to: "Small
and alert is better than big and inert".
But I'm happy to see the Inktomi code out in the free air, I've heard
much good about it, over the years, from my FreeBSD cronies at Yahoo.
And because I like a healty competition, I particularly welcome
Inktomi, because quite frankly: competing with squid is not much
fun... :-)
Poul-Henning
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[email protected] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
_______________________________________________
varnish-misc mailing list
[email protected]
http://projects.linpro.no/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
